The Pope Plans to Allow Women to the Office of Lector
#62
(11-17-2010, 03:47 PM)Gladium Wrote:
(11-17-2010, 08:03 AM)mike6240 Wrote: Vulgar languages replacing Latin?  Not gonna happen. 
The Holy Mass replaced?  Not gonna happen. 
Women in the sanctuary?  Not gonna happen. 
Communion in the hand?  Not gonna happen.
Lay people distributing Communion?  Not gonna happen.
Female Lectors?  Not gonna happen.
Female Altar boys?  Not gonna happen.

The Church has the authority to declare in what language the Mass is to be celebrated. I am fairly certain that in the extremely early Church, Mass was offered in Greek, although I am not entirely sure. However, it is not specifically decided by God that only the Latin language can be used to consecrate the Eucharist validly, which Christ did not use when he instituted it.

The Mass is a matter of the liturgy, over which the Church has control and which the Church regulates. All that is necessary for validity is to speak the words of consecration; the rest is obviously very important, but even without it, the Eucharist is still valid but illicit. The Mass has the same words of consecration. The Church has always had authority to decide what is done with the Mass.

I am unaware of any declaration in which the Church has stated that she has no authority to allow women into the sanctuary of a church. While it is certainly undesirable to have women in the sanctuary, and I do not approve of it because of our traditional practices, entrance into the sanctuary is not accompanied by an ontological change in the soul which cannot be accomplished in a woman.

Communion distribution, like the Mass, has always been based on the rules of the Church and what she has decided to be the proper method of reception. If I am not mistaken, Communion in the hand was the method of distribution in the very early Church which was changed when the presence of Christ in the Eucharist was questioned to reinforce the belief - just as the Host was only given when the heresy arose of the necessity to receive both species for a complete sacrament.

Lay people distributing Communion is, while clearly not preferable, something the Church can decide if she so chooses, because it is not accompanied by a change that cannot happen, or an inherent contradiction in itself. It is most definitely a privilege of the ordained to touch the sacred species with their own hands, but there is no logical contradiction in a layman distributing Communion like there is in the impossible ordination of a female "priest" which is tantamount to drawing square circles.

Female lectors would not have been possible when the role of lector was an ordained role, because they cannot receive ordination, but it is not an ordained role now.

Female altar "boys" are also something that is not impossible. It is not preferable, but it is possible.

The point is that there is an inherent logical contradiction in "female priest". It cannot happen. It is not like laymen distributing Communion or female altar boys because it is something that literally cannot happen, while those are not preferable but possible actions. A woman cannot be ordained, and if anyone tried, nothing would happen - no Eucharist is consecrated validly, nor are any other sacraments that require ordination valid from this person. It is definitely possible for a woman to enter the sanctuary; just look at your average parish for evidence of this. For them to be equivalent, there would need to be a force that prevented women from entering the sanctuary, making it actually impossible for them to enter, accompanied by acceptance of the phenomenon by the Church. There is a wall preventing women from becoming priests, which is the invalidity of the sacrament if attempted on a non-male.

Your entire post brings the Church down to the lowest common denominator.  All I keep hearing from those who obstinately (desperately?) defend the NO is:

All that is necessary for validity is to speak the words of consecration; the rest is obviously very important, but even without it, the Eucharist is still valid but illicit.

The Catholic Church is not the Church of the lowest common denominator.  Defending practices and so called  "Canon Law" in the Novus Ordo Church on the grounds that it is "valid but illicit" is not Catholic.  The Catholic Church is supposed to be the pinnacle and Bride of Christ.  Not something we cringe at and endure on the grounds that it is "valid but illicit".  I believe the ordination of women is in the works and will be a fact, at least in the Novus Ordo Diaconate, in the near future.  Something will come out of Rome - full of ambiguities and vagueness.  This will then trigger a rush to interpret such a pronouncement as "valid but illicit" for the start of females in the diaconate.  Then the ball will be rolling for Novus Ordo priestesses.  I'm not making this up.  This type of governence in the Novus Ordo Church has been going on since Vat. II - vagueness and abiguity - and let the bishops interpret what they may and then do their own thing - along with the sound of chirping of crickets coming from out of the Vatican.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: The Pope Plans to Allow Women to the Office of Lector - by mike6240 - 11-17-2010, 04:16 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)